Why don’t the climate change people ever speak of American successes?
2pm today
- Thread starter PotimusWillie
- Start date
Which renewables are cheaper? Solar is ineffective, takes up to much space and even costs too much to outfit one house. Wind is also too expensive requires too much land and can only be put where there is constant wind, in addition, it has a short lifespan and is devastating to birds. The only real renewable is hydroelectric and the libs have been preventing new dams from being constructed for years.
They're also building more an more coal plants as we speak.
We should email California that question if their computers have power.
you should read up on renewable costs as they have changed dramatically this decade. Utility scale solar and onshore wind are now cost competitive with (or better than) fossil fuel generation, especially for new generation. There’s a detailed report linked with a lot of good info.
the cost of storage continues to decline rapidly as technology improves - the hope is we can have the same decreases in cost of storage as we had for generation to make renewables more viable as a larger part of the grid given their current problem of being intermittent resources
and the useful life of renewables continues to increase as well. The problem has actually been more with new technology being that much better that it’s often a wise economic decision to replace the turbine with the latest rather than maintain the older generation one.
Levelized Cost of Energy and Levelized Cost of Storage 2019
Levelized Cost of Energy and of Storage shows that as the cost of renewable energy continues to decline.
Tell me which factories rely solely on wind or solar. And then tell me how we're going to power aircraft, ships, tractors, etc. And by the way, when we do away with oil, where are we going to get tires? And I would also say natural gas is better for the environment than wind or solaryou should read up on renewable costs as they have changed dramatically this decade. Utility scale solar and onshore wind are now cost competitive with (or better than) fossil fuel generation, especially for new generation. There’s a detailed report linked with a lot of good info.
the cost of storage continues to decline rapidly as technology improves - the hope is we can have the same decreases in cost of storage as we had for generation to make renewables more viable as a larger part of the grid given their current problem of being intermittent resources
and the useful life of renewables continues to increase as well. The problem has actually been more with new technology being that much better that it’s often a wise economic decision to replace the turbine with the latest rather than maintain the older generation one.
Levelized Cost of Energy and Levelized Cost of Storage 2019
Levelized Cost of Energy and of Storage shows that as the cost of renewable energy continues to decline.www.lazard.com
given the amount of wind and solar on the grid, I imagine quite a few are heavily powered by renewables today. There are a few factories and data centers being built now that will use solar + storage primarily.
and I never brought up aircraft or tractors? Weird place to go. There’s a place for fossil fuels until we have the technology at the right cost to support phasing it out. Today isn’t the day there. But the goal is to replace as much as possible where it makes economic sense. Utility scale solar is a key example, wind farms are key examples. Distributed generation is still getting there.
Plus your claim for nat gas being superior environmentally is at odds with almost all third party research. What metrics did you use to make that determination?
Alright, who would you have up there in charge? Would you like to see changes to our government, a new party?
Last edited:
There are two curves. One is for fossil fuels that are increasingly more difficult to harvest and are of lesser quality which require more expensive refining. That cost curve is going up.
The second curve is for renewables. They are, relatively speaking, in their infancy. As such, they currently are more expensive, but their costs are decreasing. Continued investment will increase the speed with which that cost curve goes down.
Alternative energy is good economic policy because it provides insurance against out of control pricing by foreign producers. Fossil fuels aren’t going anywhere as long as they are cost competitive. Alternatives are for when fossil fuels are no longer cost competitive.
Ethanol, however, is an abomination.
Get rid of Citizens United is the first place to start, somehow the Supreme Court said bribing politicians is free speech.
Our politicians are bought and paid for.
Quite an excellent post Triple D!
You are a good man Ddd! I hope his children have to stand in the same bread line that mine may And his stupidity reaps exactly what was sewn.
That’s the problem. That bread line will include a lot of people who don’t deserve to be in it, just like in all other socialist bankrupt states. These people are really stupid.
In every socialist country in the history of man, the only ones not in the bread lines are those in power. They vote for the ways of the Capital but end up living in District 12 (pardon my reference to the Hunger Games)
not false
I already posted a source showing the cost of energy for renewables is equal to or better than fossil
I can find and post sources validating my point on environmental impact. It’s pretty widely reported that renewables reduce emissions of greenhouse gasses (aka carbon) along with other air pollutants including ash, mercury, nitrogen, sulfur and others.
I imagine you aren’t claiming fossil fuels are “renewable” and won’t run out. If I have to explain that, oh my.
How much fossil fuel is required to manufacture the componentsyou should read up on renewable costs as they have changed dramatically this decade. Utility scale solar and onshore wind are now cost competitive with (or better than) fossil fuel generation, especially for new generation. There’s a detailed report linked with a lot of good info.
the cost of storage continues to decline rapidly as technology improves - the hope is we can have the same decreases in cost of storage as we had for generation to make renewables more viable as a larger part of the grid given their current problem of being intermittent resources
and the useful life of renewables continues to increase as well. The problem has actually been more with new technology being that much better that it’s often a wise economic decision to replace the turbine with the latest rather than maintain the older generation one.
Levelized Cost of Energy and Levelized Cost of Storage 2019
Levelized Cost of Energy and of Storage shows that as the cost of renewable energy continues to decline.
Those are market economies. Not socialist economies.
Ask cali how that wind stuff is working out. You youngsters got a lot to learn. Get out and get a job, pay some taxes and grow up a little.
California’s blackouts have been caused moreso by poor grid management and exportation of energy than renewables. Same thing that happened in the Enron days.
I probably make more than you, but good try
why move to China when the commies have already taken over the US?
Then why aren't we 100% reliable on renewable instead of less than ten?
legacy fossil capacity and transmission infrastructure plus the need for storage technology
it’s gone up every year as a % of generation for a long time now and will continue. Renewable only recently passed fossil for cost competitiveness once the technology improved - like in the past 5 years.
California has to rely on other state's energy to supplement theirs. They're a disaster and you know it.
Go ahead, tell us how much you make. We promise we won’t laugh.
And yet the current President is openly discussing pardoning three of his children and himself before leaving office. Maybe open your eyes and take a look at what's in front of you.
LMAO. I have learned over and over again when somebody talks about how much they earn, they’re probably a waiter in an Italian joint.
Much of it is because of their failed semi-deregulation in the 90s that significantly reduced new generation until the Enron debacle. They’ve added a ton of nat gas alongside renewables but their load and grid management has still been awful.
plus they’ve phased out a bunch of nuclear recently as older plants have been decommissioned due to various problems
they do need to continue building combined cycle nat gas as a bridge to when renewables become more predictable and manageable
I mentioned Canada, not China. But Canada is too cold for me. Seems nice in the summer though.
Fo twenty five, but then again I’m retired.
